Comment by bmitc | Hacker News Reader

Comment by bmitc | Hacker News Reader

Munger is something else. His opinions are almost that of a child. One could wager that it's due to his age, but he actually seems pretty sprite, so to speak, for his age, so I think he's just like that. Since the resignation article came out, I've watched some interviews with him, and he has unbridled confidence that the thing he's saying is right, and all the comments fawn over him. It isn't hard to understand how he's gotten to be this way.

Some quotes of his:

> “You’ve got to get used to the fact that billionaires aren’t the most popular people in our society,” he told MarketWatch. “I’d rather be a billionaire and not be loved by everybody than not have any money.”

I honestly struggle to understand what he means by this, but I have a hunch it's not good.

> “Everybody loves light and everybody prefers natural light. But it’s a game of tradeoffs,” Munger said in an interview. “If you build a big square building, everything is conveniently near to everybody in the building. If you maximize the light, you get fewer people in the building.”

Ahh, the maximal packing version of architecture.

> “What I learned was how stupid I was. Imagine taking years to decide that the kids should get their own bedroom.”

Plenty of designs allow students their own room. The fact that he considers this a design leap is problematic.

> “If this building fails, it will be the first Munger building that fails."

No introspection.

I think what is the sickest thing is the UCSB Chancellor's comment:

> UCSB Chancellor Henry T. Yang has called Munger’s proposal an “inspired and revolutionary” design that will offer “an unprecedented residential experience.”

What a sycophant.

You can’t figure out why he’d personally rather be a billionaire and not be liked by everyone vs. not have any money? Which would you prefer?

The people who are so negative about this are completely unrealistic. UCSB is putting students in off-campus hotels right now. There is an incredible housing shortage. Munger is taking a very tangible step to fix it. Some students there live in their cars (plenty of windows, I suppose) Give me a break.

You don't think setting out a dichotomy of either "being a billionaire" or "not having any money" is a just a tad narrow-minded?

Sure, tangible steps are nice. Even hobbyist billionaire architects are capable of taking tangible steps because it's quite a low bar to clear.

I do find it a bit ridiculous that you call any opposition to the plan "unrealistic", as though Munger is the only architect in the world who can save UCSB from its housing problem.

Some folks can't help worshipping rich people.

Seems like a false dichotomy. I'd trade 999 thousandths of those billions to not be unlikable.

Also, they truly exhausted all other options?

No idea why this got downvoted but this is exactly it. Also what's the point of getting a teeny sliver of money for "free" (read: by waiving your right to an opinion) when the entire project is demonstrably rather expensive to start with?

> Munger is taking a very tangible step to fix it.

He could just donate the money without trying to micromanage the project. That would help fix the housing shortage just as well.

> Plenty of designs allow students their own room. The fact that he considers this a design leap is problematic.

I believe the architect, who resigned and wrote the letter he’s reacting to, suggested this as a compromise for getting every room a window.

Of course. If you want to have his vision of a building where students are forced to spend 90% of their waking hours in mixed spaces, and have all of those spaces in the same floor, and have windows in every room, you need to have two students per room.

If you go for a traditional design that isn't trying to force students into mixed spaces that are inside the same floor, but instead placing these mixed spaces inside different floors or different buildings, you can have every room in the same building.

He and warren buffet both strike me, as a huge fan of buffet, as being incomplete humans somehow. They are like characters in a role playing game where you put all your points into “business intelligence” and severely neglected everything else. Then they grew up in an insulated bubble just thinking about money 24/7 their whole lives. Buffet himself said something along the lines of “if I was born at any other time in history I’d be eaten by an animal for lunch”. Jordan Peterson also made a good point about the very wealthy…why do we ask why there aren’t more billionaires instead of asking why some people are willing to do nothing but work 24/7 their whole lives for success. These are not people we should demean or aspire to be in my opinion. They are not healthy mentally.

Do you really struggle to understand what he means there? It's not exactly cryptic.

The implication that you have two choices, either zero dollars or a billion, isn't hard to understand because it's cryptic. It's hard to understand because it's completely irrational.

It was not in an essay. The implication was rhetorical, not logic. And, the context being missing, it could even have made sense there.

> “You’ve got to get used to the fact that billionaires aren’t the most popular people in our society,” he told MarketWatch. “I’d rather be a billionaire and not be loved by everybody than not have any money.”

> I honestly struggle to understand what he means by this, but I have a hunch it's not good.

I think it's pretty clear. He doesn't give a rat's ass about what people think of him, he has enough money for him not to care. Good for him, I guess. The problem begins when these sociopaths try to impose their views on other people, and esp. if they want to "help".

We should not encourage them with tax deductions or other incentives.

Taxes good, charity bad.

I agree with you, but I think it's actual deeper than him just not caring about what people think of him. I think it's more deeply engrained narcissism in that he doesn't trust others' expertise or opinions, thinks he's the chosen one of being right, and ultimately just likes the control he can wield over others.

Okay but now you're just making things up about him that he never said or implied. You are welcome to have whatever opinion of him you want, but it has nothing to do with his quote about preferring to be wealthy and unpopular over being popular but not wealthy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com